Poll, who will keep us safer? Bush or Kerry

Note the poll asks which candidate will keep America safer; safer from what?

For sure, Kerry would keep us safer from lower taxes, a strong defense, the right to keep and bear arms.... I'll take my chances with George Bush.
 
I may be wrong, . . . certainly hope that I am, . . . but every time I think of Ketchup Kerry as president: I get the sinking feeling that we would just turn into another Israel with all the daily bombings, terrorist attacks, etc.

Him and his barf bag friends (Tedward Kennedy, Billary & Hillary to mention a few) only want one thing: financial profit and will sell the USA out to get it.

If you think I am wrong, . . . ask yourself why Ketchup's mamasan hasn't brought one of her companies here. There ain't enough profit in it for them.

May God bless,
Dwight
 
Not to be trite, but I think some Americans feel that the invasion of Iraq might have created more terrorists than there were before, and that the non-election of Bush will quell some of the global anti-US sentiment.

Or maybe they are commenting on the constant complaints of lack of funding for increased border and shipping security since 9/11. Or Bush's soft stance on illegal immigration.

Given a stern view of where we are right now, that 60% reads more like a vote of no-confidence in Bush than necessarily a commentary on Kerry.


But heh, we're all just guessing.
 
Not to be trite, but I think some Americans feel that the invasion of Iraq might have created more terrorists than there were before,
Click to expand...

Your right Handy, we have created more terrorists by our foriegn policy and actions.

It is our fault that they blow themselves up, it is our fault they murder women and children, the beheadings are our fault. The hatred of Isreal, our fault, bus bombs? blame Bush.

We need to be more SENSITIVE toward terrorists and potential terrorists,they have feelings too!
 
Sure. If Kerry wins, the the US will be safer because terrorists will stop attacking us. That's because they will LIKE us with Kerry as President.
 
Neither. Like Bush, his fraternal elder brother Kerry is not going to drive the new Pan American State onto the rocks. As long as that is the case, there will be no adequate control of our borders, and those streaming in will continue to do so.

Bush has done nothing about this for four years, and neither would Kerry.
 
Not to be trite, but I think some Americans feel that the invasion of Iraq might have created more terrorists than there were before, and that the non-election of Bush will quell some of the global anti-US sentiment.
Click to expand...
Awwww deer widdle feelwings... I forgot to take in to account their little feelings. Ooops! I forgot that I couldn't care less about the feelings of the hate America first crowd, because no matter what convoluted illogic they need to use, they are going to find a way to hate America first!!!

I wouldn't spit on them if they were on fire. :mad:

If half the American population wants to surrender to death-cult psychotics I say get to it. Don't surrender to them in the abstract, get on a plane, go over to one of the kitty-litter trays, or other desolate places they inhabit, and show them what it means to be a pathetic weakling. See how impressed they are by it. The herd needs thinning anyway, and if the barbarians wear out their arms/entertain themselves/etc. sawing off the heads of weaklings, so much the better. More food, air, water, etc. for me.

Besides, if the Kerry supporters and other idiots were to identify themselves to the barbarians, it would keep both groups busy. Fewer innocent people would become random targets, and we could bomb the hell out of the barbarian camps each night when the barbarians barely manage to make a fire so they can roast the heads they sawed off that day. win/win
 
Well Fred, maybe you should care.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't make a bit of difference. We are talking about people who spit on their own countrymen while wishing to placate people who saw the heads off of innocent kids.

I might as well waste my time wondering why a cold soda doesn't fall out of the sky whenever I'm thirsty.
They get to vote, just like you.
Click to expand...
True, but again there is nothing I can do to solve that problem. I would like to see a requirement for an I.Q. above 50 to be eligible to vote, but the under 50 crowd will always be able to out-vote me. Quite the paradox eh?
 
"I may be wrong, . . . certainly hope that I am, . . . but every time I think of Ketchup Kerry as president: I get the sinking feeling that we would just turn into another Israel with all the daily bombings, terrorist attacks, etc."

As opposed to what we have now, where we have created our own Beirut where US forces walk around in a free-fire zone with a target painted on their backs?

"Not to be trite, but I think some Americans feel that the invasion of Iraq might have created more terrorists than there were before, and that the non-election of Bush will quell some of the global anti-US sentiment."

There is no question the first part of your statement is true, but we will never test the second part because King George is going to be re-elected.
 
"Sure. If Kerry wins, the the US will be safer because terrorists will stop attacking us. That's because they will LIKE us with Kerry as President." There is an old story about the two hunters being chased by a bear. One guy says: "Forget it... no way to outrun a bear." Second guy says: "I don't have to outrun the bear.. I just have to outrun YOU!!"

The Islamofascists do hate the US for a laundry list of reasons, and they are not going to stop because we get a new president. But, we could be moved down the priority list of their targets to attack. Remember, Bin laden publicly stated his most hated target was saudi Arabia #1 (Because they allowed US forces to use it as a base), and Iraq was #2 (because they pounded the hell out of the Islamic state of Iran). Al qaeda has limited resources, and we want to get far enough down the list so they don't spend them on us.
 
Al qaeda has limited resources, and we want to get far enough down the list so they don't spend them on us.
Click to expand...

You want to be at the bottom of their list, I want to see the ones making the "list" hunted down, captured or killed.
 
Why, would you have come up with your own island hopping campaign after Pearl Harbor?

National defense is a federal function. I don't have enough friends to go in on an aircraft carrier.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top